Welcome to Thunderdome

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:35 pm**

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 2:51 pm Startup valued at $7B, about to IPO, just received $750M in cash, and has "about $1B on the balance sheet" lays off 900 workers via Zoom.

When the worker revolution begins, will anyone be surprised?

I dunno. Why were they laid off? Did they suck? Was their business unit failing?

The dude did a terrible job by making it about himself, but still... people get laid off. That's capitalism.

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:13 pm**

TheCatt wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:35 pm
Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 2:51 pm Startup valued at $7B, about to IPO, just received $750M in cash, and has "about $1B on the balance sheet" lays off 900 workers via Zoom.

When the worker revolution begins, will anyone be surprised?
I dunno. Why were they laid off? Did they suck? Was their business unit failing?

The dude did a terrible job by making it about himself, but still... people get laid off. That's capitalism.

First of all, the dude is an absolute cunt. That's indisputable.

As for the rest, I had the same questions. I'm wondering if it was done for the IPO? Based on the specific way he phrased it, I'd say yes. I don't know how that would help, but I know jettisoning employees can help make bottom lines look better for potential sale, so I assume the same thing for an IPO?

However, if it was a failing business unit, then I would fully understand the layoffs and would be more pissed at the MSM for not reporting that critical aspect of the layoffs.

I've very pro-capitalism, but I think capitalism involves acting ethically and legally. I think it should also involve concern over the overall economy/health of the communities and countries it operates within. Call me crazy, but it's called capitalism, not "selfish fucks squeeze every last dime out of a company and who gives a fuck what happens after we cash out-ism".

I don't give two fucks if a CEO makes 700% more than his mailroom workers. I do care if he or she makes that much and the mailroom workers need government programs to survive.

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:58 pm**

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:13 pm As for the rest, I had the same questions. I'm wondering if it was done for the IPO? Based on the specific way he phrased it, I'd say yes. I don't know how that would help, but I know jettisoning employees can help make bottom lines look better for potential sale, so I assume the same thing for an IPO?

Better.com does mortgages. You know what's been really low for a long time and started climbing recently? Mortgage rates. I'm guessing refis are slowing down, and their business is not slowing down.

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 4:13 pm Call me crazy, but it's called capitalism, not "selfish fucks squeeze every last dime out of a company and who gives a fuck what happens after we cash out-ism".

I think you need to read capitalism's origin story and one of its main concepts.

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 9:21 pm**

I'm quite familiar with Adam Smith, his invisible hand, and how it's fisting the country.

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 9:27 pm**

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 9:21 pm I'm quite familiar with Adam Smith, his invisible hand, and how it's fisting the country.

I mean... are you?

Posted: **Tue Dec 07, 2021 10:52 pm**

We've gone into this discussion multiple times. I don't believe consumers have much influence anymore. The government and Wall St have the most influence on business, not in the that order. Throw in international politics, the MSM, and the absolutely unfair amount of information corporations (marketers) have to use against consumers.

Most Americans hate Congress, the last two presidents, cancel culture, woke bullshit, and so on, but here we are...

Posted: **Wed Dec 08, 2021 2:02 pm**

Leisher wrote: ↑Tue Dec 07, 2021 9:21 pm I'm quite familiar with Adam Smith, his invisible hand, and how it's fisting the country.

Maybe leisher's right

Posted: **Wed Dec 08, 2021 3:09 pm**

I have absolutely no idea how to fix it, but Wall St, while being a completely necessary tool/entity, has become the worst influence on business.

Posted: **Wed Dec 08, 2021 3:46 pm**

I think the only solution is government intervention.

However, it has to be complete. Obamacare forbade insurance companies from making excess profit, obstensibly to keep prices down. Instead, they hid profits by building building building buying hospitals, and growing that way. No one is saying "wow I love my low cost health insurance."

They're about to rename Toledo "Promedica City," for example.

Posted: **Fri Dec 10, 2021 12:51 pm**

Costco adds a new perk for members.

Posted: **Fri Dec 10, 2021 4:12 pm**

If they keep cheap Chinese shit off of it, I'll look into it.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:57 am**

TheCatt wrote: ↑Fri Mar 20, 2020 8:34 am Burr does not, from what I've been reading.

Burr should have faced the death penalty, or at least forever in jail.

Meanwhile, people are FINALLY talking about limiting Congress' ability to trade stocks. No shit, dipsticks.

“I’m an advocate for banning stock trading by members of Congress who make policy, who have access to information and economic forecasting,” Ossoff said Tuesday during a Senate hearing.

Amen, Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga..

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 12:53 pm**

TheCatt wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:57 am Burr should have faced the death penalty, or at least forever in jail.

You leave Bill Burr alone! He's a national treasure!

TheCatt wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:57 am Meanwhile, people are FINALLY talking about limiting Congress' ability to trade stocks.

A massive no brainer.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:27 pm**

It's weird how the people who make laws won't make a law making it illegal for them to make money dishonestly.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:32 pm**

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:27 pm It's weird how the people who make laws won't make a law making it illegal for them to make money dishonestly.

The WSJ recently ran an article about hundreds of cases where judges should have recused themselves due to large financial conflicts (owning AMZN stock and overseeing a case about Amazon, for instance). The judges were initially pretty dismissive and "we regulate ourselves." It gained some traction, but no actions so far.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:10 pm**

It's weird how judges who interpret the law won't interpret it in such a way that it hurts themselves financially.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:56 pm**

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:27 pm It's weird how the people who make laws won't make a law making it illegal for them to make money dishonestly.

This

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:10 pm It's weird how judges who interpret the law won't interpret it in such a way that it hurts themselves financially.

And this.

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 6:00 pm**

Leisher wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:56 pm
GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:27 pm It's weird how the people who make laws won't make a law making it illegal for them to make money dishonestly.
This

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:10 pm It's weird how judges who interpret the law won't interpret it in such a way that it hurts themselves financially.
And this.

it’s almost like people can’t be trusted

Posted: **Wed Jan 12, 2022 7:28 pm**

Just hope their gaze doesn't fall upon you.

Posted: **Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:25 am**

Welcome to Thunderdome

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions

Bad Economic Predictions